Was Crowley Wrong? And Did Obama Call It An “Act Of Terror?” – No and Yes

Well Obama decided to study this time around as opposed to the first debate where her arrogantly believed it was going to be an easy victory for him over Romney. That is a good thing because now we have something closer to a real debate. I must say it was refreshing to have both Obama and Romney defend and attack in real time, while looking directly at each other.

While I was following along the myriad of Tweets from political commentators and journalists I saw a massive outcry when moderator Candy Crowley sided with Obama in defending him from Romney’s accusation (or questioning) of whether or not Obama called the attack in Libya on September 11th 2012 as an “act of terror.” The outcry mostly came from the right claiming that he did not call it an “act of terror” and instead focused on the religious aspect of it as a riposte to an amateur anti-Islam film.

Well I read the entire speech by the president conducted on the following day of September 12th in the Rose Garden. While many journalists are desperately picking apart words, I also side with Obama that he did in fact attribute the attack as an “act of terror.” Also in my personal opinion I find it absolutely refreshing that a moderator, a journalist to boot, addressed the truth in real time. Many are angry with Crowley, and I would be too if she was actually incorrect. If she was incorrect then it would show she was speaking out of personal opinion and obviously showing favoritism towards one candidate. What she did was address the truth while not letting an incorrect accusation, which can obviously be researched due to it being about words in a speech and not a matter of opinion, go unnoticed.

The president was advised to spin the attack as a riposte to an amateur film, which was a very incorrect thing to do, while turning it around and finally addressing the attack as it truly was, an act of terror. Proudly I must say that not at one moment did I actually fall for the silly spin, instead I always believed and saw the attack as an act of terror morbidly celebrating the anniversary of 9/11.

Please don’t just take my word for it, instead take the president’s:

Good morning. Every day, all across the world, American diplomats and civilians work tirelessly to advance the interests and values of our nation. Often, they are away from their families. Sometimes, they brave great danger.

Yesterday, four of these extraordinary Americans were killed in an attack on our diplomatic post in Benghazi. Among those killed was our Ambassador, Chris Stevens, as well as Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith. We are still notifying the families of the others who were killed. And today, the American people stand united in holding the families of the four Americans in our thoughts and in our prayers.

The United States condemns in the strongest terms this outrageous and shocking attack. We’re working with the government of Libya to secure our diplomats. I’ve also directed my administration to increase our security at diplomatic posts around the world. And make no mistake, we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people.

Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts.

Already, many Libyans have joined us in doing so, and this attack will not break the bonds between the United States and Libya. Libyan security personnel fought back against the attackers alongside Americans. Libyans helped some of our diplomats find safety, and they carried Ambassador Stevens’s body to the hospital, where we tragically learned that he had died.

It’s especially tragic that Chris Stevens died in Benghazi because it is a city that he helped to save. At the height of the Libyan revolution, Chris led our diplomatic post in Benghazi. With characteristic skill, courage, and resolve, he built partnerships with Libyan revolutionaries, and helped them as they planned to build a new Libya. When the Qaddafi regime came to an end, Chris was there to serve as our ambassador to the new Libya, and he worked tirelessly to support this young democracy, and I think both Secretary Clinton and I relied deeply on his knowledge of the situation on the ground there. He was a role model to all who worked with him and to the young diplomats who aspire to walk in his footsteps.

Along with his colleagues, Chris died in a country that is still striving to emerge from the recent experience of war. Today, the loss of these four Americans is fresh, but our memories of them linger on. I have no doubt that their legacy will live on through the work that they did far from our shores and in the hearts of those who love them back home.

Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourned with the families who were lost on that day. I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of ArlingtonCemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed. And then last night, we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.

As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe.

No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.

But we also know that the lives these Americans led stand in stark contrast to those of their attackers. These four Americans stood up for freedom and human dignity. They should give every American great pride in the country that they served, and the hope that our flag represents to people around the globe who also yearn to live in freedom and with dignity.

We grieve with their families, but let us carry on their memory, and let us continue their work of seeking a stronger America and a better world for all of our children.

Thank you. May God bless the memory of those we lost and may God bless the United States of America. – President Barrack Obama on September 12th, 2012 in the Rose Garden

Yes that’s right we have moved over to our own self hosted site. The URL is

4 Comments

Bill

A whole lot of nothing really. Even in this video you kindly sent us she doesn’t admit she was wrong in saying that Obama called it an “act of terror.” I mean it’s not really dealing too much with semantics here. If you read the exact transcript provided above (if you don’t trust it then I suggest searching for other sources) you’ll see that he did say “act of terror”: “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation.”

I agree also if you read my article above that he said it was due to a silly amateur film. But according to the Rose Garden speech specifically there is no sign of such a claim and he does claim that it was an act of terror. Also he points out that “there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts.”

So with all due respect I kindly ask you; which part of our article is incorrect?

Juan Galan

Hogwash! His line about terror was too ambiguous. As you have noted, he also said in the same speech: “Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.”
What do you think he means by that? It’s clear to me he is insisting on blaming the stupiod video. Besides, four days later, Ambassador Rice still insisted on the video when she addressed the UN. Obama was not clear about the “terror thing” until two weeks later, when, lo and behold, everybody knew and he couold not deny it any longer!

Hahaha hogwash? Really? He was not too ambiguous at all. He even says the exact words.

““Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.”
What do you think he means by that? It’s clear to me he is insisting on blaming the stupiod video.” Are you serious? It’s really clear to you that he’s insisting on blaming the video from this line? If you think when he said “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation.” is too ambiguous but the quote you chose isn’t even more distant then you obviously think along the lines of a conspiracy theorist, where when you look for something you’ll always find it.

I don’t know why you think that I don’t agree that the administration tried to spin it all by having it be about the stupid film. This was obvious that they did so. BUT my point and only point is that in his speech he rather unambiguously (especially compared to your chosen quote and point) said that is what an act of terror. Where do you not see that? With the line “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation” where do you see ambiguity and instead a claim about a not even mentioned film?